With the weeks-long recount complete, unofficial numbers confirm that state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser narrowly defeated:D Assistant Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg in the April 5 election, but the fight may now turn to court.

Final recount numbers expected to filed later Friday showed Prosser with a 7,006-vote :Dadvantage over Kloppenburg. Kloppenburg will spend the coming days reviewing the findings of the recount to determine whether to sue over the results, said Kloppenburg campaign manager Melissa Mulliken.

"I'm not going to speculate" on the likelihood of a lawsuit, Mulliken said. "We have to look at the record and analyze the...

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/122364728.html

fettpett

05-20-2011, 09:03 PM

Klppenburg should have to pay for that recount...dumbass

Apocalypse

05-20-2011, 09:19 PM

Thought I read some where Klop was ready to go to the courts with this. Regardless of the count out-come.

Apocalypse

05-20-2011, 09:32 PM

Found it,

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/121958509.html

Few key lines

The recount process in Wisconsin is unfolding as prescribed by Wisconsin law.

It wasn't done under the law, Klop, choose to invoke it.

... When the [Journal Sentinel] Editorial Board says the recount is a "mere preamble to the court challenge," it is wrong on the facts and wrong to prejudge my intentions.

She is double speaking here. Trying to make it look like she wont drag this on.

Wisconsin law specifically anticipates that there may be court challenges to the recount, but those challenges can only happen after the recount is done. The recount is not "merely" a preamble to anything: It is a process that proceeds in prescribed ways when an election is this close.

megimoo

05-20-2011, 09:35 PM

Klppenburg should have to pay for that recount...dumbass
They couldn't steal it so now they're going to drag it out !

fettpett

05-20-2011, 10:42 PM

They couldn't steal it so now they're going to drag it out !

yep

PoliCon

05-20-2011, 10:45 PM

which just makes me wonder what the DU has to say about this. :D

Apocalypse

05-21-2011, 07:02 AM

Some thing in the line of "We know what the voters really wanted, so we will just ignore that bogus outcome and give them what we all know they really wanted".

Apocalypse

05-21-2011, 07:09 AM

And out of Milwaukee Journal.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/122364728.html

Prosser attorney Dan Kelly said earlier this month he was concerned a legal challenge would take months and lead to a temporary vacancy on the court. The next 10-year term on the seven-member Supreme Court begins Aug. 1.

...

Ultimately, the issue could be decided by the Supreme Court - unless a temporary vacancy in Prosser's seat produces a 3-3 tie, in which case a lower court might have the last word.

Ladies and Gents, we have their reason to try a court challenge. This would shift power enough that when the union bill hit the court, they could kill it in the court.

fettpett

05-21-2011, 09:36 AM

And out of Milwaukee Journal.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/122364728.html

Ladies and Gents, we have their reason to try a court challenge. This would shift power enough that when the union bill hit the court, they could kill it in the court.

yeah, it's no surprise, they are just trying to fuck up the Walker plan and Union thing.

Sadly I think Walker screwed the pooch on this one, I know that they needed to get this done before now, but it probably would have been better to wait until after the SC election to do it. oh well

AmPat

05-21-2011, 11:26 AM

Can we petition the courts to force the DIMoRATS into a more suitable name? They clearly don't believe in democratic government.:mad: